Changes

'''''The Two Babylons''''', subtitled ''The Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife'', is a famous [[treatise]] written by a [[Presbyterian|Scottish Presbyterian]] minister, the Reverend [[Alexander Hislop]], first printed in 1853 as a pamphlet and greatly expanded in 1858. ''The Two Babylons'' was first published as a book in 1916. The full title is ''The Two Babylons or The Papal Worship Proved to be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife''.  

'''''The Two Babylons''''', subtitled ''The Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife'', is a conspiracy theory book written by [[Presbyterian|Scottish Presbyterian]] minister, the Reverend [[Alexander Hislop]], first printed in 1853 as a pamphlet and greatly expanded in 1858. ''The Two Babylons'' was first published as a book in 1916. The full title is ''The Two Babylons or The Papal Worship Proved to be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife''.  

The author claims that the [[Catholic Church]], with its [[Pope]]s and [[Sacrament]]s was founded by the Roman Emperor [[Constantine]] in A.D. 325 as a blend of [[paganism]] and [[Christianity]]. He says the cross is a [[Paganism|Pagan]] symbol, that it "was the unequivocal symbol of Bacchus", and "This Pagan symbol seems first to have crept into the Christian Church in Egypt, and generally into Africa."<ref>[https://www.cbcg.org/twobaby/sect56.html The Two Babylons Alexander Hislop - Chapter V, Section VI The Sign of the Cross], third and fifth paragraphs.</ref> The book became widely circulated as being a reliable refutation of the Catholic religion. Hislop presented Catholicism as the [[Whore of Babylon]], and this argument has been taken up by mostly conservative [[Evangelical Christians|Evangelical Protestants]] such as the [[Reformed Churches]], [[Baptist]]s, the [[Church of Christ]], [[Armstrongism|Herbert W. Armstrong]] and his [[Armstrongism|Worldwide Church of God]], and the [[King James Only|King James Only movement]]. In the 20th century it has been promoted mainly by [[Fundamentalism|Christian Fundamentalists]], and has been a standard source for children's and adult [[Sunday School]] education, and its arguments have been widely promulgated in publications, religious dictionaries and encyclopedias, and [[comic book]]s, and most recently on a multitude of popular [[internet]] sites. It has influenced countless multitudes of Christians and non-Christians, and has been a source (but not the only source) of [[polemic]]al invective against Catholics, particularly against those involved in [[government]] and [[politics]]. For more than a century (1853-1955) it was among the top best-sellers in England and America, and is still being published.

The author claims that the [[Catholic Church]], with its [[Pope]]s and [[Sacrament]]s was founded by the Roman Emperor [[Constantine]] in A.D. 325 as a blend of [[paganism]] and [[Christianity]]. He says the cross is a [[Paganism|Pagan]] symbol, that it "was the unequivocal symbol of Bacchus", and "This Pagan symbol seems first to have crept into the Christian Church in Egypt, and generally into Africa."<ref>[https://www.cbcg.org/twobaby/sect56.html The Two Babylons Alexander Hislop - Chapter V, Section VI The Sign of the Cross], third and fifth paragraphs.</ref> The book became widely circulated claiming to be a refutation of the Catholic religion though every modern historian views it as inaccurate and unequivocally false. Hislop presented Catholicism as the [[Whore of Babylon]], and this argument has been taken up by mostly conservative [[Evangelical Christians|Evangelical Protestants]] such as the [[Reformed Churches]], [[Baptist]]s, the [[Church of Christ]], [[Armstrongism|Herbert W. Armstrong]] and his [[Armstrongism|Worldwide Church of God]], and the [[King James Only|King James Only movement]]. In the 20th century it has been promoted mainly by [[Fundamentalism|Christian Fundamentalists]], and has been a standard source for children's and adult [[Sunday School]] education, and its arguments have been widely promulgated in publications, religious dictionaries and encyclopedias, and [[comic book]]s, and most recently on a multitude of popular [[internet]] sites. It has influenced countless multitudes of Christians and non-Christians, and has been a source (but not the only source) of [[polemic]]al invective against Catholics, particularly against those involved in [[government]] and [[politics]]. For more than a century (1853-1955) it was among the top best-sellers in England and America, and is still being published.

A sharp critique of common Roman Catholic practices and traditions, the book looks at the historical elements having similar appearance to those elements involved in various rites and positions held by the Church.  The result claims to be a revealing of how non-scriptural practices were fused with the teachings of Christ.  The work is complete with over 61 woodcut illustrations and liberal use of scholarly works dating from 1506 AD to 1858 including ''Milner's Church History'' (1712), ''Pontificale Romanum'' (1543, 1572), ''Justinus Martyr'' (1777), and ''Missale Romanum'' (1506, 1677).

A seemingly sharp critique of common Catholic practices and traditions, the book looks at the historical elements having similar appearance to those elements involved in various rites and positions held by the Church.  The result claims to be a revealing of how non-scriptural practices were fused with the teachings of Christ.  The work is complete with over 61 woodcut illustrations and liberal use of scholarly works dating from 1506 AD to 1858 including ''Milner's Church History'' (1712), ''Pontificale Romanum'' (1543, 1572), ''Justinus Martyr'' (1777), and ''Missale Romanum'' (1506, 1677).

The topics include:

The topics include:

The work has been completely discredited by painstaking professional historical research, and thoroughly rebutted and refuted by strongly [[Evangelical Christians|evangelical]] former supporters who did follow-up research of their own.

The work has been completely discredited by painstaking professional historical research, and thoroughly rebutted and refuted by strongly [[Evangelical Christians|evangelical]] former supporters who did follow-up research of their own.

Historians who have carefully researched the historical claims made in this book, and the source materials that author Hislop relied on, have determined that he is unreliable as an historian. Almost all of his "facts" are shown to be false, and his reasoning from superficial similarities of appearances and ritual actions is demonstrated to be completely unsound and without merit as "proofs" of pagan origins. This has demolished his credibility. 16th–19th century anthropologists who were contemporaries of the authors of his source materials have also shown that even among historians in the 16th–19th centuries most of his sources had no reliable historical credibility as researchers.

Historians who have carefully researched the historical claims made in this book, and the source materials that author Hislop relied on, have determined that he is unreliable as an historian. Almost all of his "facts" are shown to be false for example it claims nimrod married semiramis when they lived millena apart and the only thing we know about nimrod was he was the great grandfather of [[noah]] and he was a good hunter, and his reasoning from superficial similarities of appearances and ritual actions is demonstrated to be completely unsound and without merit as "proofs" of pagan origins. This has demolished his credibility. 16th–19th century anthropologists who were contemporaries of the authors of his source materials have also shown that even among historians in the 16th–19th centuries most of his sources had no reliable historical credibility as researchers.

Impartial and objective evaluations by non-Catholic reviewers of this book have also determined that it is simply a [[calumny]] against the Catholic religion. This has refuted his Christian integrity as a writer. This does not prove that Alexander Hislop was a [[Lie|liar]], but only that his book is full of [[falsehood]]s. There is a difference. He may indeed have been sincere in his belief. His [[Research|methology]] was entirely wrong. His conclusions are [[error]]s.

Impartial and objective evaluations by non-Catholic reviewers of this book have also determined that it is simply a [[calumny]] against the Catholic denomination. This has refuted his Christian integrity as a writer. This does not prove that Alexander Hislop was a [[Lie|liar]], but only that his book is full of [[falsehood]]s. There is a difference. He may indeed have been sincere in his belief. His [[Research|methology]] was entirely wrong. His conclusions are [[error]]s.

Individual Christians who have enthusiastically read ''The Two Babylons'', and dismissed all criticism against it as negative [[propaganda]], and made the effort to diligently research its claims in order to defend it, have been profoundly disappointed in the book and its author, whom they assumed was telling the truth. Many of them have been astonished that a book so fully discredited should still be sold in Christian bookstores and recommended by online internet Christian sites. It is still being promoted as factual truth.

Individual Christians who have enthusiastically read ''The Two Babylons'', and dismissed all criticism against it as negative [[propaganda]], and made the effort to diligently research its claims in order to defend it, have been profoundly disappointed in the book and its author, whom they assumed was telling the truth. Many of them have been astonished that a book so fully discredited should still be sold in Christian bookstores and recommended by online internet Christian sites. It is still being promoted as factual truth.

[[Jack Chick]]

[[Jack Chick]]

[[Essay:Reasons the Catholic Church is Unbiblical]]

[[Essay:Reasons the Catholic Church is awesome]]

[[Prejudice]]

[[Prejudice]]